Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 11th May 2013 21:41 UTC
Windows "Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening." That's one way to start an insider explanation of why Windows' performance isn't up to snuff. Written by someone who actually contributes code to the Windows NT kernel, the comment on Hacker News, later deleted but reposted with permission on Marc Bevand's blog, paints a very dreary picture of the state of Windows development. The root issue? Think of how Linux is developed, and you'll know the answer.
Permalink for comment 561307
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This is anti-MS propaganda
by triangle on Mon 13th May 2013 02:30 UTC
triangle
Member since:
2013-05-13

This is total propaganda and I am sick of it. Windows is BY FAR the fastest OS. Linux is absolute junk. While the Linux kernel may be OK...and I stress may be OK... let us not accept such things on blind faith... Linux as a complete operating system is total garbage. I could easily (as could any honest person with a little experience and honesty) write endlessly about all the problems with Linux... let me focus on speed. Linux fast? TEST ONE: Find an older computer. Let's say an Athlon XP 2500+ with 1GB ram (that is a LOT of ram!) and ATI 8500 radeon and install Ubuntu 12/13, or Mint 13/14, or Fedora 18. It won't even run and if it does it will be so slow that the OS won't be usable. Any GUI operation will take like a minute. Now load Windows XP on the same computer and it will turn into a speed demon. Please stop with the propaganda. TEST TWO: Find a system such as a core 2 duo with 4GB ram and mid range gf card like NVIDIA 8400. Now set up an Ubuntu12/13 or Mint13/14 VM, and a Windows 7 VM. The Linux VM will be unusable because it is a resource hog. The Windows 7 VM will be lightning fast. CONCLUSION: It is a fact that Windows is faster and lighter as a complete operating system than Linux or MAC (yes, you can set up mac a vm also). A Linux freak may argue that you can strip down Linux to the kernel andno x server and it will be faster. Or use some primitive bare minimum GUI system. Yeah? So what? That is like comparing a non functional OS to a functional one and saying that the non-functional (or barely functional one) is superior because it is faster. No... no. Let us compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. In other words, real world tests of modern COMPLETE Linux distros and modern complete Microsoft OSs..... as I have above. That is what matters. The truth is, and I know this will hurt... Linux isn't even up to Windows 95 level when it comes to functionality. And MAC is not much better than Linux. No, I'm not a Microsoft fanboy just sick of this BS. I use Linux at work (soft engineer), MAC i7 and Windows 7 gaming PC at home.

Reply Score: -1